IIRC, there should not be a low-wall (production) example that low in serial number.  The earliest low-walls were literally high-walls with the sidewalls cut down and the back corners of the (still high) breech block rounded off slightly, and these began to be made in the third year of 'wall production.  It would be possible for one of these to have a high-wall trigger tang from earlier production, but I would expect any production low-wall, having been made in the third year of production, to have a serial number at least in the four digit range.  There is reputed to have been one low-wall produced early on for an exhibition in London(?) during about the second year of 'wall production, but even that one should have had a 4 digit serial number.

Where is this stippled "engraving" on the receiver?  A few pictures might help clear up the confusion.

Oh yeah, if it IS a Browning-made 'wall, it probably won't have a removable lower tang and the internals will be somewhat different from a Winchester low-wall.  Mason made some changes for purposes of mass production.

HTH, send more info (and/or pix) please!
Green Frog

Machinist, it is my belief that there were no Browning Low Walls. All the Brownings I have seen (Two) and pictures, 6 have shown an action that does not really look like the Action we have come to know as the Winchester Hiwall, Lowall Model 1885. All the Brownings I have seen and heard of were big caliber Rifles as used for Hunting big game. When Winchester bought the rights to the Model 1885 they spent a year redesigning it for manufacturing. The lower tang was changed from a solid part of the reciever and made as an inserted piece. Again for manufacturing reasons. The Brownings I have seen were very rounded at the top, not at all shaped like the Winchester.  Winchester also created the Ball seat at the back end of the action for the stock to seat into. I am not sure when Winchester started making Lowalls but I have two early models and they both have 4 didgit serial numbers. HTH
Regards, FITZ.

Thank you all very much.  The guys at Bench Rest Central said that you guys would know how I needed to proceed.   
I will try to get some pictures and more information for you to work with.   
Thanks again.
Scott

PS  3-6 bits, from period statements quoted in John Campbell's two books on the Winchester Single Shot, it would appear that the folks @ Winchester spent quite a while seeing if they could build something close enough to Browning's design to be good, but different enough so they wouldn't have to pay for the patent.  They couldn't!   [/quote]


Why would they try to improve it when they had already paid for it and owned it for seven years before they marketed it in 1885?

The 10,000.00 paid to John M. was up front, they got a distributorship for WINCHESTER from the deal. This is why the confusion, none of these explanations ever make any sense? 

I don't even understand the info given in the bio, that WINCHESTER was worried about these young gun makers way out west that was cutting into any market of their's?

I buy the fact that WINCHESTER was in trouble with the 1876 and needed to improve. Remember that a year after the 1885, wala John M's  WINCHESTER the 1886 hit the shelves.

According to what little documentation there is, and Val Browning's recollections, the 1885 wasn't purchased from John Browning until May of 1883, so a couple years of developement isn't unheard of.

Green_Frog wrote on Oct 17^th, 2007 at 10:38pm:


Hammer, Froggie, think hammer!

If not, then don't worry too much, I don't keep score with my friends.
Best regards, Joe

Boys, I have six floor to ceiling book cases loaded with gun books and I can not find my copy of the Browning bio. So I hope the information you have is from the bio, as my memory is different of what the book says.

DERN being old SUCKS!!!!!